Apart from accumulating a bunch of foreign reserves and constructing a truckload of huge buildings that other countries cannot be bothered building anymore, China’s self-proclaimed “rise to power” does not include the cultivation of any soft power it can brag about. Therefore, China has had to resort to locating antiques and has even rolled out Confucius (孔子) in its quest to establish some form of soft power. In the process, Beijing has established Confucius Institutes around the world and even erected a huge statue of Confucius standing on equal ground with the statue of former Chinese leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東) in Tiananmen Square.
As China was busy honoring Confucius, the Taiwanese Ministry of Education also just happened to announce that it will be listing the Four Books of Confucianism as “basic teaching materials for teaching Chinese culture” and that it will make the study of them compulsory in senior high school in the hope that the 2,000-year-old teachings can be a super-fix for complex problems, such as school bullying and drug use among students.
Unexpectedly, before it had been there for even 100 days, the Confucius statue was removed from Tiananmen Square, suddenly and mysteriously in the space of one night — spirited away just like many of China’s human rights activists have been “removed.” In China, where things are not transparent and where every last thing has a political connotation, the sudden appearance and disappearance of the statue is no trivial matter.
Since ancient times, the reverence, or lack thereof, that Confucius has received in China at any one time has been a good way of judging developments in Chinese politics. Confucius has also been the scapegoat for cultural and political struggle in China for a long time.
During the May Fourth Movement, the slogan “Down with the Confucian shop” became popular. In the 1970s, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) initiated a movement in which former CCP vice chairman Lin Biao (林彪) and Confucius were denounced together. These developments in China made dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) very happy. He in turn used the opportunity to start revering Confucian thought again as part of a “cultural renaissance.”
Chinese President Hu Jintao’s (胡錦濤) sidekicks must know about how Mao admired China’s first emperor, Qin Shihuang (秦始皇) and his burning of books and burying of scholars. Mao referred to the first emperor as the pioneer of the anti-Confucian movement. Mao even laughed at Chinese author Guo Moruo (郭沫若) when he said the communist party of the future would worship Confucius.
The display of statues of Confucius and Mao together in Tiananmen Square represents a major battle for status between Confucianism and Maoism in China and this struggle clearly shows that China is not the “harmonious society” the Chinese government would like us to believe. There is obviously more than meets the eye behind Hu’s sudden backtracking.
China’s “rise” is all about money, corruption and an ever-increasing gap between the rich and poor. These have become the “Chinese characteristics” Beijing so often talks about and this has provided Maoist proponents, the leftists, with a chance to make a comeback. Those that are now in power do not dare reform the system and they are incapable of solving problems, so now they have brought out Mao’s foe, Confucius.
Anti-Confucians have long criticized Confucians as talking a lot about humanity, justice and morality with nothing but greed and lust in their hearts.
In the recent battle between Confucius and Mao, Confucius has lost and the people who decided to erect the statue in Tiananmen Square could be in serious trouble. Taipei has been emphasizing Confucius as a model for the times by reviving the old practices of revering Confucius and studying the Confucian canon. However, the recent “disappearance” of the statue in China and the fact that it is unlikely to ever see the light of day again, is very interesting.
If Confucius doesn’t re-appear, this would be a good thing, as it would save Taiwanese students from being forced to recite his scriptures.
James Wang is a commentator based in Taipei.
Translated by Drew Cameron
The 75th anniversary summit of NATO was held in Washington from Tuesday to Thursday last week. Its main focus was the reinvigoration and revitalization of NATO, along with its expansion. The shadow of domestic electoral politics could not be avoided. The focus was on whether US President Biden would deliver his speech at the NATO summit cogently. Biden’s fitness to run in the next US presidential election in November was under assessment. NATO is acquiring more coherence and teeth. These were perhaps more evident than Biden’s future. The link to the Biden candidacy is critical for NATO. If Biden loses
Shortly after Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) stepped down as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 2012, his successor, Xi Jinping (習近平), articulated the “Chinese Dream,” which aims to rejuvenate the nation and restore its historical glory. While defense analysts and media often focus on China’s potential conflict with Taiwan, achieving “rejuvenation” would require Beijing to engage in at least six different conflicts with at least eight countries. These include territories ranging from the South China Sea and East China Sea to Inner Asia, the Himalayas and lands lost to Russia. Conflicts would involve Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia,
The Sino-Indian border dispute remains one of the most complex and enduring border issues in the world. Unlike China’s borders with Russia and Vietnam, which have seen conflicts, but eventually led to settled agreements, the border with India, particularly the region of Arunachal Pradesh, remains a point of contention. This op-ed explores the historical and geopolitical nuances that contribute to this unresolved border dispute. The crux of the Sino-Indian border dispute lies in the differing interpretations of historical boundaries. The McMahon Line, established by the 1914 Simla Convention, was accepted by British India and Tibet, but never recognized by China, which
The Constitutional Court on Wednesday last week held a preparatory hearing for an injunction request to halt the enforcement of controversial new amendments to government oversight laws. Constitutional Court oral arguments are scheduled for Aug. 6 on the constitutionality of amendments to the Act Governing the Legislative Yuan’s Power (立法院職權行使法) and the Criminal Code, which were passed on May 28 by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) lawmakers. The amendments were signed into law on June 24 and promulgated on June 26. However, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislative caucus, the Executive Yuan, President William Lai (賴清德) and the Control